MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093139043 · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-2

Assessing outcomes of large-scale public health interventions in the absence of baseline data using a mixture of Cox and binomial regressions

2014· article· en· W2093139043 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Research Methodology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicSurvey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFHI 360Indian Council of Medical ResearchUniversity of ManitobaBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsCondomPsychological interventionScale (ratio)Negative binomial distributionStatisticsInferenceBaseline (sea)PopulationEconometricsMedicineComputer scienceMathematicsEnvironmental healthHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Poisson distributionFamily medicineGeographyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Large-scale public health interventions with rapid scale-up are increasingly being implemented worldwide. Such implementation allows for a large target population to be reached in a short period of time. But when the time comes to investigate the effectiveness of these interventions, the rapid scale-up creates several methodological challenges, such as the lack of baseline data and the absence of control groups. One example of such an intervention is Avahan, the India HIV/AIDS initiative of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. One question of interest is the effect of Avahan on condom use by female sex workers with their clients. By retrospectively reconstructing condom use and sex work history from survey data, it is possible to estimate how condom use rates evolve over time. However formal inference about how this rate changes at a given point in calendar time remains challenging. METHODS: We propose a new statistical procedure based on a mixture of binomial regression and Cox regression. We compare this new method to an existing approach based on generalized estimating equations through simulations and application to Indian data. RESULTS: Both methods are unbiased, but the proposed method is more powerful than the existing method, especially when initial condom use is high. When applied to the Indian data, the new method mostly agrees with the existing method, but seems to have corrected some implausible results of the latter in a few districts. We also show how the new method can be used to analyze the data of all districts combined. CONCLUSIONS: The use of both methods can be recommended for exploratory data analysis. However for formal statistical inference, the new method has better power.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.167
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.356
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1670.356
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.893
GPT teacher head0.685
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it